May 22

17

Our kingdom for a grocery store

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 17, 2022
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Westgate • Yucca district • Zanjero | Tagged With: Albertsons, Aldi, Assistant Director Jessi Pederson, Bashas, City of Glendale, Director Brian Friedman, Frys, Glendale Economic Department, Safeway, Sprouts, Trader Joes, Whole Foods, Winco Foods, Yucca district | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

This blog is for the CEO of every grocery chain operating in Arizona:

Aldi
Whole Foods
Kroger (Frys)
Trader Joes
Sprouts
Albertsons
Safeway
Bashas
Winco Foods

I have been on and off city council since 1992 and to date have served 22 years on Glendale’s City Council as the Yucca District Councilmember. Over the past 22 years a grocery store has never located within the Yucca District. Within the past 5 years a minimum of a dozen multifamily complexes have been constructed or will be completed this year within this geographic area. Each complex has a minimum of 200 units. That’s 2,400 units at 2.3 persons per unit or 5,520 new arrivals in the Yucca district. Add new residential construction of a minimum of another 2,000 units and you can add another 5,000 persons. The residential subdivision of Stonehaven alone will have 1,635 new homes. New construction, both multifamily and single family residential, has added an estimated 10,000 people to the district.

The Yucca District base population before all this new construction is 40,000 persons. In other words, with the addition of the new residential, this district has a population of 50,000 persons with no place to do our weekly grocery shopping. There is a Super Walmart within the district, but a majority of the residents don’t use it. Instead, we are forced to use the closest Safeway in Phoenix or the closest Fry’s in Peoria, both of which are in neighboring cities, some miles away. A typical resident spends between $200 and $300 a week for food and household items.

The most common request I receive from Yucca district residents is for that of a traditional grocery store. Any grocery store that does a one-mile or five-mile demographic study will discover that there are sufficient rooftops and sufficient income to support a grocery store in this area.

I am personally sending this blog to every CEO with a request to do demographic research of this area. You will find that it not only meets your criteria but exceeds it. Better yet, I encourage you to contact Glendale’s Economic Development Department’s Director, Brian Friedman (623-930-2984; bfriedman@glendaleaz.com) or the Department’s Assistant Director, Jessi Pederson (623-930-2996; jpederson@glendaleaz.com) . They can provide the economic data that you seek. This is a community that wants you and will patronize you regularly.

I know my district and I know my residents. This is a community that not only wants you but needs you. I suspect that were you to locate in the Yucca District, your revenue projections will be greater than your best financial forecast. Please consider locating in the Yucca District. You won’t be disappointed.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

^{This site contains copyrighted material the use of which is in accordance with Title 17 U.S. C., Section 107. The ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law and who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such material. For more information go to}^{http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml}^{. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.}

May 22

12

Stick to the zoning

Posted by Joyce Clark on May 12, 2022
Posted in City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale zoning issues • Yucca district | Tagged With: City of Glendale, Mr. Jon Froke applicant, Planning & Zoning Commission, Planning and Zoning Commissioners, Planning Department, zoning | 2 Comments

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

This is another blog that is overdue. This topic is of special interest to me for many reasons. One of which occurred recently. On April 28, 2022, the Planning Commission took up GPA 22-01 and ZON 22-01. Well, what’s that? Mr. Jon Froke, representing the property owners, Dorothy Keith and Teresa Zaddack, for 5.3 acres located at 5136 N. 83^rd Avenue in Glendale was seeking high density multifamily zoning.

Before I relate the events of that evening, it’s important to understand what zoning is and why it is important to a community. Zoning has been used by cities large and small, throughout the country since the 1930’s, nearly 100 years.

The purpose of zoning is to create a city plan that develops a balanced city. Zoning is how the local government regulates and develops land within its control. Zoning helps protect the local environment and keep property values stable. It is broken down into multiple categories to help balance a city to ensure proper land use and to provide value to citizens that own property.

Every city has multiple zoning categories, from residential to commercial to industrial to multifamily, to name a few. Usually, there are more zoning categories than you have fingers. Within each zoning category there are regulations and guidelines for the benefit of the property owner so that person knows exactly what is required.

By legal right a property owner can develop that property as it is currently zoned. For example, a property that is currently zoned for commercial can be developed as commercial after the property owner has had the plans approved. Approval would be required, among other standards, to ensure proper setbacks (distance) from a street and surrounding structures. That is not the only requirement. Usually, there is a list of items.

A property owner does not have the legal right to develop the property in a different zoning category without first presenting the plan to the Planning Department and seeking the approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council.

This is important: by legal right a property owner can develop property within the zoning category identified for the property. There is no legal right for a property owner to develop outside of that identified zoning category. The property owner is legally required to seek approval from the city for any change in zoning. It is up to the property owner to make the case that a change in zoning is not detrimental to the city or surrounding property owners. Only if the case is made will the property owner be granted the right, by the city, to develop in a different zoning category.

That brings us to the night of April 28^th and the hearing held for the property at 5136 N. 83^rd Avenue. This segment, about an hour and a half, was a clown show. Once again, the Planning Commission (P&Z) demonstrated that it doesn’t understand its role as a citizen advisory body.

I took the time to transcribe this portion of the P&Z meeting. I reviewed it for accuracy and to remove typos, but I am sure that I missed some typos. So, please forgive them. I am providing the link here: Transcript Planning Commission Ap 28 2022

Before I comment on the meeting, let me explain exactly what Mr. Froke was requesting. a minor amendment to the Glendale General Plan from LDR-2.5 (Low Density Residential – 2.5 units/acre) to HDR-20 (High Density Residential – 20 units/acre); and for a rezoning from SR-17 (Suburban Residential 17,000 square foot minimum lot size) to R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) for 5.03 acres.

Some context is required. There are only two areas within Glendale that have large swaths of land zoned as SR-17 (Suburban residential, lot size of 17,000 square feet). One is comprised of 500+ acres south of Union Hills and around 67^th. This land has already been developed at 1 to 4 lots to the acre. Those lots appear to be around 4 homes to the acre with lot sizes in the 8,000 to 10,000 SF range. Was the development a deviation from the SR-17 zoning? Yes, but it was decided to be appropriate as it was single family residential to another single family residential category with a reasonable modification as to the lot sizes (or density). It appears as if the lot sizes went from 17,000 SF down to 8,000 SF, a jump in density by 2 zoning categories. The applicant(s) made their case that rezoning would not be detrimental to the city or surrounding neighborhoods.

The other large swath, about 200 acres, is along 83^rd from Glendale to Northern. Much of the land has already been developed as single family residential on large lots. The property in question is within this sea of large lot development along 83^rd and the applicant is requesting to go from single family residential to multifamily residential by placing 20 units to the acre. The applicant is seeking a jump in density by 6 zoning categories from SR-17; SR-12; R 1-10; R 1-8; R 1-6; R 1-4; R 2 to R3. That, in and of itself is excessive.

There were several things about this particular P&Z agenda item that were concerning and by reading the transcript, I think you will agree. The first was the P&Z philosophy seems to be that by right, the property owner should be granted the right to rezone the property to any zoning category and P&Z was there to ensure that it happened. Not so. The applicant comes before the P&Z to make the case that it should receive greater, more dense zoning. In my estimation, the applicant did not make the case. Mr. Froke said this property would be a transition between the commercial development to its immediate south and the large lot, single family residential to its immediate north. However, across the street there is commercial directly to the south of and abutting large, single family lots of an acre or more (where our Mayor lives). It has been like this for 20 years or more and there have been no issues between the commercial and the large lot residences.

Another area of concern was the belief of Chairperson Vernon Crow that it is the responsibility of the P&Z to facilitate consensus in allowing this type of development at that location and to do so, to broker a meeting between the applicant and the surrounding neighborhoods. That is not the role of nor the responsibility of the P&Z.

Yet another area of concern was Commissioner Tom Cole’s request that the Planning Department has an obligation to provide both sides of the request. Excuse me, the Planning Department’s obligation is to present the facts of the application and to present the facts regarding its recommendation. In this case, it was a recommendation of denial. It did that and is under no obligation to present the case for the applicant. That is the applicant’s responsibility.

I believe Commissioner Gary Hirsch was out of order. As the Interim Planning Director, Tabitha Perry, was summarizing the reasons for the department’s recommendation of denial, Commissioner Hirsch interrupted her and accused her of “selling” the recommendation of denial. He was rude and his comments were inappropriate.

I also was not impressed by the city’s senior planner, George Gehlert. His job was the present the facts and to support the department’s recommendation of denial. In my estimation, he failed to do so.

What was the result? The first motion, made by Commissioner Hirsch was for approval and failed for lack of a second. The second motion, made by Commissioner Nowakowski was for denial and failed due to a tie vote with Commissioners John Crow (no relation to Vernon Crow), Martin Nowakowski and John Guers supporting denial and Commissioners Vernon Crow, Tom Cole and Gary Hirsh not supporting denial. The final motion, made by Commissioner John Crow, was to table with the applicant deciding when it would be brought back before the Commission. All Commissioners supported the motion except for Commissioner Gary Hirsch.

My greatest concern is that if approved, this decision becomes precedent setting for the entire city. It opens the door to any large lot, residential property owner within all of Glendale to seek similar zoning. There are many single family, large lot properties throughout Glendale that would then have the potential to develop a property as dense, multifamily. If this action is approved, it is going to be extremely difficult to deny a similar zoning request to any other large lot property owner.

It makes the city’s zoning plan irrelevant. Why would a zoning plan be needed if the intent is to ignore it? It creates the ‘Wild West’ in development of the city. If current zoning is to be ignored then there is no rationale to adhere to it or keep it.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Apr 22

13

Beauty is in eyes of beholder

Posted by Joyce Clark on April 13, 2022
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Code Department • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials | Tagged With: beautification strategies, Broken Window Theory, City of Glendale, Code Department, Neighborhood Revitalization, Police Department | 6 Comments

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

City logo June 30, 2017

Glendale, Arizona was incorporated on June 18, 1910, and had a population of just over 1,000 people. By 1940, its population was 4,800 and in 1950 it had grown to 8,170. In 1964, the population had grown to 42,000 and when I moved to Glendale in 1968, it had a population of 45,000. By 1975, it grew to 67,000. From then until 2010, in a period of just over 40 years, its population exploded and quadrupled to 226,721. Today, in 2022, its population has expanded to 263,000. Expect to see another 10,000 to 20,000 added over the next five years. It is the 7^th largest city in Arizona and the 87^th largest city in the United States.

All other West Valley cities, historically, developed much later than Glendale and most of them still contain vast amounts of raw land just waiting for development. Glendale, on the other hand, is truly a mixture of the old and the new. South of Northern Avenue is the old Glendale. You can tell the old Glendale from new Glendale just by looking at it.

Arrowhead Ranch, a premier area in north Glendale, at one time was destined to die and was saved in the early 1980s by a city investment of $80 to $100 million for its infrastructure. The strategy to have all the infrastructure already in place made the area attractive to developers and relieved them of the burden of paying for it. It caused Arrowhead to take off like a rocket. If you would like to learn more about the land that became Arrowhead Ranch, I refer you to this article written by Jen Fitfield in 2020: https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-arizona-republic/20200223/281947429877999 . The article is substantially accurate although I disagree with some of the material presented.

The city’s investment in Arrowhead included but was not limited to roads and drainage, provision of water and sewer services and operation of the sewage plant. It was not without cost. That major investment sucked the financial oxygen from the rest of the city, especially the older portions. In essence, old Glendale, through its tax base paid for new Glendale. For at least a decade, while dollars were being spent to save the dream of Arrowhead, funding was not available to maintain, preserve or beautify the rest of Glendale. Portions of the city languished while in other portions outright decay occurred. Once decay and blight take hold, unless immediate measures are taken to stamp it out, it becomes like sludge and oozes outward consuming anything in its path.

It is time to pay attention to old Glendale. I’ve been thinking about this idea for quite some time. I am calling for a major campaign by our City Council and senior management to focus on the beautification of Glendale. It should include several elements. Although the city has recently and justifiably spent $125,000 on beautification of the rights-of-way in the Ocotillo district, it has not made the same commitment to other older portions of the city. There must be a commitment to remediate those areas as well. All city rights-of-way (ROW) should be adequately graveled, with abundant desert landscaped plants and trees, and free of litter.

An element of a beautification campaign must include overlay or special zoning designed to protect areas from oversaturation of unwanted uses. City Council must identify those uses which are not positive for an area. Those uses could include but are not limited to tattoo parlors, pawn shops, loan shops, convenience stores, automotive repair/retail uses, liquor stores, etc.

At one time, the city had a liquor density criteria, limiting the number of retail liquor stores within a one mile radius. Sadly, that has been abandoned. Today, you can travel some of the city’s major arterials and see several tattoo parlors, a couple of tire shops and a couple of package liquor stores, one after another. This should not be my Glendale or your Glendale.

I suggest that the city place a cap on the number of ‘unhealthy neighborhood’ retail establishments. Hypothetically, say the city has 100 tattoo parlors throughout the city. I believe we have every right to say “no more” and that we have reached the saturation point and we will not discriminate but will limit the number of a use within our city. The same type of cap should be placed on other non-beneficial uses determined by consensus of the council.

In addition, the city must offer incentives to attract beneficial, retail uses such as small, grocery stores (that offer wholesome food choices and not incidental to liquor sales), cafes, bakeries, professional services such as insurance, medical offices, etc.

The city over the past several years has rewritten and adopted many code changes. Some of them will be considered as too harsh but that consideration is usually made by the worst offenders. Many, although not all of the changes, were made by a citizens Code Review Committee and approved by the council. Some were generated by employees of various departments.

Often councilmembers have been told that code has been hampered in its ability to do all that has been asked of it because it has been understaffed. To that end, in the upcoming Fiscal Year 2023 budget a majority of council has authorized the addition of 4 more code inspectors which will make the department fully staffed.

I would like the code department’s use of “Focus Areas” resurrected. This strategy used in the early 2000s quite successfully. A code inspector, often with input from the community, would identify a specific area, usually no larger than ½ mile, as a Focus Area. Letters would be sent to every resident informing them of the designation as well as identifying the most common code violations and that they could expect code to be in their neighborhood to cite all violations. They would be asked to be proactive and to correct their issues prior to a code inspector’s issuance of a warning or violation. The residents in that collective area would be given 30 days to remediate issues after which an inspection would occur, and any remaining violations would be cited. It was very successful because it provided education to the residents, gave them time to correct any violations on their own and resulted in very few actual citations. Many neighborhoods were cleaned up and blight was removed. We haven’t done this program for 15 or 20 years. With full staffing in code there is no valid reason why this program can’t be implemented again.

Another program begging to be reinstituted is the Neighborhood Revitalization Program. Prior to the Great Recession in 2007, the city made small dollar grants to neighborhoods that identified a specific beautification project they wanted to accomplish. It was required that the project beautify a neighborhood and that the work be performed by volunteers from the neighborhood. There was an application process and a citizens’ committee that made the decision on awarding the grants. Neighbors would volunteer their time toward the revitalization project and the grant paid for supplies. One of the criteria today should be that this is for neighborhoods 40 years old or older, any neighborhood established before 1982. The Revitalization Office even kept an inventory of tools, such as hoes, rakes, lawn mowers, shovels, hammers, etc. and they were lent out to the neigbhborhood volunteers to undertake their project, much like one would borrow a book from our library.

Another element to recapture our blighted neighborhoods is a return to the “Broken Windows” theory of policing first used in the 1980s in New York City and Boston. The theory is that when a neighborhood looks trashy, hence the term “Broken Window” (code’s responsibility) and minor crimes are allowed to proliferate, that sends a signal to the criminal element to move in and take over. It takes a concerted effort, a partnership between the Police Department and Code Department to target neighborhood areas of blight. Unfortunately, these are underserved areas of our community.

Lastly, adding art to neighborhoods demonstrates yet another level of city commitment toward beautification. The city has a dedicated arts fund and a beneficial use of these substantial art funds would be to bring art elements into older neighborhoods (to start) signaling that our city is committed to clean, safe and beautiful neighborhoods.

To recap these are the programs I believe Glendale must implement to successfully beautify Glendale:

Beautify all rights-of-way throughout the city
Implement special zoning to cap certain retail uses throughout the city
Implement a city incentive program to attract more beneficial retail uses adjacent to neighborhoods
Support city council’s decision to add additional code inspectors
Reimplement the use of “Focus Areas” in neighborhoods
Reimplement the Neighborhood Revitalization Program
Reimplement the “Broken Window” theory
Add art elements to neighborhoods

These initiatives will not result in instant remediation but over time we can and will see our neighborhoods improve. Rome wasn’t built in a day and neither will beautification of our city occur overnight. The first step in the most important and that is to get each of these elements established, funded and up and running.

Every resident in Glendale should be able to live in clean, safe and beautiful neighborhoods, free from crime and blight. It’s a quality of life issue that translates into preserving or even increasing your property’s value.

I am proud of Glendale and all that it has accomplished but there is more work yet to be done. Will you join me in support of a “Beautify Glendale” initiative? I have created an online petition at the ipetitions website. Let our city council know that you support such an effort. I will leave the petition up for a month or so. Please tell your friends and neighbors throughout Glendale about this effort and ask them to join us. Can we get a thousand signatures? Please go to: https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/beautify-glendale-az . The time is now.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Mar 22

25

Love letters

Posted by Joyce Clark on March 25, 2022
Posted in City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Yucca district | Tagged With: anonymous mail, City of Glendale, Yucca district | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Every elected official receives hate mail. Usually, it’s because of a hot topic. Sometimes it’s just because a citizen is obsessed and really hates the official. I don’t receive hate mail. I do sometimes receive nasty phone calls and in 22 years I have received probably 3 or 4 nasty letters. In the exchange below there is someone who has become obsessed with me and once a month sends me his/her version of love on postcards. I am not bothered. It comes with the territory, but this latest string is actually sad and shows how ill-informed someone can be. So here goes along with my editorial comments in red.

#1 “Joyce, Your twitter is like cat litter. (I think cat litter is very useful and aren’t we all glad someone invented it) Cut the crap (BTW, Twitter is OK but Gettr is Bettr) and start serving the people of Glendale. Please retire soon.” (Just to aggravate my admirer I may run for another term)
#2 “Thank you Joyce for spreading misinformation that you’ve gathered from right wing OAN?…NEWSMAX?…Fox?…(I admit to watching all three. Doesn’t all media lie?) and not getting a Covid booster shot! Maybe someone who desparately (sic) would like to have it, can have yours! (I’m sure someone out there did) We hope you don’t get Covid, or, (I know this will disappoint, but I have not had Covid) If you do, don’t have long term side effects…but…if you do get Covid, maybe Glendale AZ will get a new council member that actually serves the community.” (You hope I don’t get it, but if I do, are you wishing for my death?)
#3 “Joyce Clark should resign! Her spreading of misinformation , bigotry and white supremacy views are unacceptable!” (Complete lack of creativity. I wish writer could have been more original rather than using buzz words that have lost all meaning)
#4 “Joyce, Please retire!! 800,000 US COVID DEATHS! 800,000 Families CRYING! 12,000 Deaths in Maricopa County,+ More deaths again! – at schools!! (Aw, come on now. I’m not powerful enough to have caused all of this, am I?) Stop spreading misinformation! Stop the white supremacy, bigotry, stop watching social media + DO YOUR JOB!!” (Alert everyone. If you watch social media you become too paralyzed to work)
#5 “How low can Karen Joyce Clark go?? (Excuse me, but aren’t Karens are usually Democrats?) It’s ok for Republican David Gowan to make money off a fireworks bill and ruin our peace! (I advocated for a fireworks hours limitation bill in the legislature that passed this year) Its ok for John Fillmore to introduce legislation to limit AZ voting rights. (In recent national polls, 78% want voter reform) God forbid if there (sic) housing developments for low income families and families that have been displaced because of high rents. (Not sure I get this sentiment. Glendale has disbursed over $7M in rental subsidies to keep people in their homes) Come on Joyce. Stop the disinformation and resign or retire! We don’t care about your opinion. DO YOUR JOB!” (For someone who claims to not care about my opinion, he or she obviously spends a lot of time seeking my opinion…)
#6 “Jobs, jobs, jobs in Greedy corporate warehouses, (More jobs for our residents are wonderful!) In high rent greedy corporate housing, in a polluted, brown sky city, expanding its landfill with more and more plastics and toxic waste. (I love our landfill and so do thousands of our residents who use it each month, even you do) ZIP IT, CLARK!!”
#7 “Dear Joyce, Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah! You are getting to be known in Glendale as ‘NVJ’ (Nazi Vagina Joyce). (At least this insult showed a bit more creativity than the others, but still not very original) Do your job or move to Russia with your buddies at Fox.” (I’m not sure I want to learn the language)

You may be asking, just what am I reading? My office receives at least one of these anonymous ‘love letters’ each month. It’s always the same style of postcard and in the same handwriting. To tell you the truth, my council assistant and I are starting to look forward to them. I just wish this person were more creative or brave enough to sign a name to them. Instead, this person uses vitriolic language with no examples or evidence to back up vague statements. In all seriousness, this person is obsessed and needs help. Can you imagine your life being so barren that the highlight of your month is to send a hate-filled postcard to your local, elected official. So sad.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Mar 22

23

More Good News in Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on March 23, 2022
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Camelback Ranch Spring Training Facility • Cholla District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale and the NFL Super Bowl • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Glendale zoning issues • Luke Air Force Base • Ocotillo District • Sahuaro District • State Farm Stadium • Westgate • Yucca district • Zanjero | Tagged With: "New Froniter", Bell Road corridor, City of Glendale, Oasis Water Treatment Plant, public safety mobile command center, Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant, Senator Mark Kelly, Westgate Zanjero | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

The good news for Glendale just keeps coming and I wanted to share the news with you. On Friday, March 18^th, the Mayor, I and city councilmembers welcomed Senator Mark Kelly to our Oasis Water Treatment Plant to recognize and thank him for his successes in acquiring federal funding for Glendale-specific projects. He lobbied and secured $2 million in federal funding for the city’s water interconnect project which will provide water from Peoria and Phoenix should there be an emergency and we have to shut down the Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plant.

Senator Kelly was also successful in securing $710,000 in federal funding to replace Glendale’s 20+ years old, public safety mobile command center. Thank you, Senator Kelly. Each of these is a critical project for Glendale and we are pleased that each of these projects can now be realized.

Two more blockbuster developments are coming to Glendale’s “New Frontier” in the area of the Loop 303. On March 9^th, Nestle announced that it would invest $675 million to build a manufacturing facility expected to open in 2024. It will create over 350 jobs, primarily for Glendale residents, with salaries that begin at $60,000 using professional staff, production and manufacturing leaders, technical staff, engineers and more.

Today, March 23^rd, Williams-Sonoma, the world’s largest digital-first, design-led and sustainable home furnishings retailer announced it has leased 1.25 million SF facility to be developed as manufacturing at The Cubes in Glendale. This facility is also in the “New Frontier.” It is expected to open in the fall of 2022 and will create over 2,400 jobs by 2027 at an average salary of $50,000.

All of this once again, signals Glendale’s tremendous growth and showcases our ideal location for national and international businesses. Think about some of the facilities that are already in Glendale with Red Bull, White Claw and Rausch in the “New Frontier.” Add the soon-to-be-open Crystal Lagoon Island Resort, Pop Stroke and Chicken ‘n’ Pickle joining the Gila River Arena, State Farm Stadium and Camelback Ranch in the Westgate/Zanjero area. Next year Glendale will host the Super Bowl followed by the NCAA Final Four. Then add national companies, such as Humana and Bechtel to our lineup. The recent locates of several luxury car dealerships, such as BMW and the Tesla Service Center are part of Glendale’s line up. Last, but certainly not the least, Glendale is the proud home of Luke Air Force base, a training center for the F-35 fighter jet.

Nearly 4,000 residential units, both single family and multifamily, will be completed this year or next adding over 13,000 new residents in the Yucca district alone. All of Glendale’s districts – Cholla, Sahuaro, Barrell, Cactus and Ocotillo – are welcoming new developments as well.

If you are not impressed, you should be. Glendale has come of age with the impressive Bell Road Corridor of retail as well as the equally impressive Westgate/Zanjero entertainment and retail district and the explosion of manufacturing and distribution development in the “New Frontier” at the Loop 303. Cities, to remain healthy, must grow or they die. Glendale has no intention of dying.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Feb 22

27

Proposed town houses amid a sea of residential large lots

Posted by Joyce Clark on February 27, 2022
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Glendale zoning issues • Yucca district | Tagged With: 83rd Avenue large lot corridor, City of Glendale, proposed 70 town houses, Yucca district | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

There is a 4.58 acre property located at 5136 N. 83^rd Avenue. For years the family raised Mastiffs. The parents are elderly now and the daughter is selling the property. So far, that sounds OK and it is but not at the expense of their neighbors and the surrounding area.

Jon Froke was the city’s planning director for many years and back in the day, he assisted in

Georgia Avenue

preserving the 83^rd Avenue corridor for large, residential lot development. Now, he owns Froke Urban Planning, LLC. and is representing the property owners of this acreage. Apparently, preserving the 83^rd Ave. corridor for large lot development is no longer on his agenda. This is the only area in west Glendale where prospective owners can find lots that are 8,000 SF, 10,000 SF, a half-acre, an acre or even larger.

Mr. Froke, representing the property owners, is seeking a General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential (LDR2.5) to High Density Residential 20 (HDR 20, 20 units to the acre) and a Rezoning from Suburban Residence (SR-17) to Multifamily Residence (R-3). At the nationally recognized average 2.3 persons per unit that adds another 161 residents. In terms of traffic that could add about 300 trips (coming and going) per day. It will certainly impact traffic in this area.

It should also be noted that these large residential properties are selling for a minimum of $600,000 to over a million dollars. Many of these properties are irrigated and the SRP yearly cost to water many of them is $200.00. Almost all have horse privileges.

This proposed development is not compatible with the surrounding area. The only necessary buffer is an 8 Ft. wall on the south side of the 4.5 acre property with heavy landscaping.

Montebello Ave

On both the northeast corner and the northwest corner of 83^rd Ave. and Camelback Road there is commercial. On the northeast corner there is a small commercial center that includes a convenience store/gas station and an Arby’s, among others. On the northwest corner is Dignity Emergency Center and an EOS Fitness Center. The property owner and Mr. Froke claim the 70 town houses will be a buffer for the existent large lot properties to the north and west of this property. But wait a minute, there is no buffer between the commercial on the northeast corner and the acre properties abutting to the north side and east side of the commercial parcel. They have co-existed for 20 years or better without an issue.

So the claim that the 70 town houses are needed as a buffer for adjacent large properties to the north and west is not historically supported by existent development.

To give you a sense of what the area contains here is a map of the area:

As you can see there is a sea of green (SR-17) surrounding both commercial corners. The yellow portions are R 1-8 (8,000 SF lots); the cream portions are R 1-10 (10,000 SF lots). The gold portions are around 75^th Avenue and are typical R 1-6 (6,000 SF lots). The red, purple and light blue portions on the corners of 83^rd Avenue and Camelback Road are General Office, Commercial or Planned Area Development (PAD) and are lighter commercial.

If you live in this area, along 83^rd Avenue, please check my Facebook page, Joyce Clark, as I

Missouri Estates

plan to call a meeting in the very near future of any residents who oppose this high density proposal. Action will be required by citizens to let the Planning Commission and the Mayor and City Council know that this is not compatible with the residential properties in this area.

^{© Joyce Clark, 2022}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Dec 21

19

Glendale has 40% of all Valley economic growth

Posted by Joyce Clark on December 19, 2021
Posted in City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale and the NFL Super Bowl • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Glendale finances • Phoenix Metro issues • Westgate • Zanjero | Tagged With: City of Glendale, Crystal Lagoon Glendale, economic development, Gila River Arena, Westgate, Zanjero | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Glendale has become a growth leader in the metro area over the past 5 to 7 years. The most startling fact to share is this – “ According to Colliers, there are 19.2 million square feet of space currently under construction throughout the region, with almost 40 percent of that in Glendale.” No other city in the Valley has experienced this kind of growth. This is remarkable. I credit our City Manager, Kevin Phelps, and our city’s Economic Development Department.

For those of you who are not ‘fact nerds,’ this blog may be boring but Glendale’s remarkable transformation since 2014 is worth noting.

In 2014, the city’s bond rating dropped to BBB. In 2020, the city’s bond rating is now AA. This rating is extremely important because this rating results in lower interest rates when the city borrows money. The amount of bond debt per person in Glendale has dropped from a high of $771 to $384 today.

City Council created a policy deliberately concentrating on employment growth in the Loop 303 Corridor dubbed the “New Frontier.” Even though residential growth was not a prime objective, since the last census, Glendale’s population has grown by 21,000 new residents with more than half of that growth occurring since 2015 and its total population is now over 250,000 people. Between 2016 and 2021, 4,880 new housing units both multi-family and single family, have been constructed. There has been a concerted effort to concentrate multi-family in the Westgate/Zanjero area to sustain and support this major economic center.

Glendale is one of the 5 top Valley cities having a jobs per capita ratio today of 0.40 and it is expected to continue to increase. Over 118,000 residents are employed with 21% of its residents working in Glendale. Most of our residents, about 57% work in Phoenix. On the other hand, about 30% of Glendale’s workforce lives in Glendale with about 25% of Glendale’s workforce living in Phoenix and about 15% living in Peoria.

All this new economic growth has increased General Fund revenues from $174M in Fiscal Year 2010 to $241M in Fiscal Year 2020. In Fiscal Year 2021, the city council approved Glendale’s first billion dollar total budget. The General Fund is used to finance the day-to-day operations of the city and includes all employee compensation. Planning and Permitting revenues saw a dramatic jump from $4.5M in Fiscal Year 2018 to $37M in Fiscal Year 2021. This is primarily due to all the new Loop 303 development. This revenue is one-time money that can and has been used for catching up on improving Glendale’s amenities.

Let’s not forget the Crystal Lagoon Island Resort, Glendale, development. I’m not sure it is appreciated just exactly how much impact this single project will have on Glendale, the Valley and the State. Click on this link if you would like to see the live feed of ongoing construction at the site: https://app.truelook.cloud/dashboard/553/923/live?code=15hm7ev0xey9jmgpfyf2jd9e0&fbclid=IwAR2VhkoN56nBnnmqMouCzAWFM9BHxtvSmNlj83REtd_D2fuA3g9vdeZ-SAY

With the 3 hotels, the public water feature, 5 nodes of retail/restaurant and the Mattel family amusement center, this project is a game changer for Glendale. Expect about 5,000 visitors a day with an annual attendance of about 12 million. It is expected to generate about $10M a year in sales tax revenue for Glendale. It is the owners’ intent to be open prior to the Glendale hosted Super Bowl in 2023. With the exposure surrounding the Super Bowl, expect visitors not just from the Valley or State but nationwide, even internationally. It will become one of THE places at which to have a family vacation.

With the remodeling of the city owned Gila River Arena focusing on the customer experience at a major concert venue, set to occur next year (2022), again, in time for the Super Bowl, expect attendance spill over from the Crystal Lagoon Island Resort. Just imagine a family vacation for several days with all that the Lagoon offers plus attending a concert at Gila River Arena and all the offerings at Westgate/Zanjero. It makes for a great family vacation package.

What do all the numbers and facts and figures mean? It means Glendale is not just financially healthy but is about to become the gorilla of the Valley. Hear Glendale roar!

^{© Joyce Clark, 2021}

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Dec 21

10

The Arizona Coyotes are a hot mess…still

Posted by Joyce Clark on December 10, 2021
Posted in Arizona Coyotes • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Gila River Arena • Glendale Economic Development • Glendale elected officials • Phoenix Metro issues | Tagged With: Arizona Coyotes, Arizona Department of Revenue, Arizona Veteran;s Memorial Coliseum, Athletic, City of Glendale, City of Tempe, Craig Morgan, Katie Strang | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

On December 3, 2021, the State of Arizona’s Department of Revenue (DOR) filed a tax lien against the Arizona Coyotes in the amount of $1.3 million with approximately $250,000 being owed to the City of Glendale for unpaid taxes. The tax lien states the team owes taxes as far back as June 2020 (that’s a year and a half). In the City of Glendale letter sent to Xavier Gutierrez, President and CEO of the Arizona Coyotes, advising the organization if payment on back taxes as well as monies owed to ASM Global, manager of the Gila River Arena, were not paid in full by close of business on December 20, 2021, not only would the organization be locked out of the building, but their Glendale business license would be terminated. See the correspondence below:

This latest development should come as no surprise if you had read Katie Strang’s Athletic story, Dysfunction in the desert: Finger-pointing, fear and financial woes roil the Coyotes organization published in February 16, 2021. Here is the link: https://theathletic.com/2390146/2021/02/16/arizona-coyotes-investigation-toxic/ . Be forewarned, you must subscribe to the Athletic to read the full article. It is well researched, in-depth and a fascinating read. Ms. Strang also provides strong coverage of the organizations’ structural disfunction. Excerpts from her story referring to the organization’s past financial issues include the following:

“Meruelo’s acquisition of the Coyotes was supposed to portend a new era for the team. Instead, people within the organization and across the NHL are now wondering if the league erred in approving his purchase.”
“In April, the team announced it was furloughing half of its staff due to pandemic-related financial issues. In May, the Arizona Republic reported that promises to pay the arena’s part-time and hourly staff members had not been met. The team and arena management company, in response to the report, said they would ‘finalize our support plan that will be executed within the next 30 days’.”
“In September, The Athletic reported that a handful of players did not receive their signing bonuses on time.”
“The Athletic identified and spoke with eight vendors with whom the Coyotes had outstanding or past due balances or negotiated their debt to a lower amount.”
The Seyfarth Shaw law firm has been retained to investigate various allegations associated with the organization. “Among them, Seyfarth Shaw representatives have asked about:

The accuracy of financial documents provided to third parties, such as banks and private lenders, required to meet specific loan obligations. The accuracy of financial reports the organization sent to the league, which reflect team revenues and can potentially impact player salaries and the salary cap.”

It was Ms. Strang who broke the December 8, 2021, Athletic story regarding the Coyotes’ unpaid taxes. Here is the link: https://theathletic.com/news/coyotes-could-be-locked-out-of-home-arena-by-city-of-glendale-for-unpaid-arena-charges-delinquent-tax-bills/ArAVPFTj0LId/ . I imagine Garry Bettman’s (President of the National Hockey League) call to Mr. Meruelo, after the story broke about unpaid taxes was short and sweet…Pay those @#$%&* taxes now!

On December 9, 2021, the Coyotes organization issued the following statement saying they have launched an investigation to determine “how this could have happened.” In their press release they state, “Initial indications are that it appears to be the result of an unfortunate human error. Regardless, we deeply regret the inconvenience this has caused. We will make sure that by tomorrow morning, the Arizona Coyotes are current on all of our bills and owe no state or local taxes whatsoever. And we will take immediate steps to ensure that nothing like this can ever possibly happen again.”

If this sounds familiar, it should. According to Katie Strang’s February 16, 2021, article, when asked about paying players, “Gutierrez described both of these snafus as ‘process’ failures.”

Once again, Gutierrez seems to be pointing the finger at “process failures” implying it wasn’t deliberate but rather a glitch in the system. Maybe if it had happened once and in isolation with no background of financial questions it would be accepted as a plausible answer but there seems to be an ongoing pattern of “process failures.”

It is also no small matter to possibly lose the organization’s business license. It’s not just a matter of possibly being locked out but without a business license even if an alternate venue were found, it couldn’t be used without having a license to do business.

Today, December 9, 2021, the media is reporting that a short while ago, the Coyotes wired the entire amount to the State DOR. We do not know if they have also paid their arrears with ASM Global. I would advise Glendale to double check and to make sure all unpaid amounts are now current. One would expect no less considering the avalanche of negative publicity they generated yesterday and today.

I suspect there is more to the Arizona Coyotes’ story that will have to unfold shortly. Right now, the most pressing issue is meeting the NHL’s schedule deadline to submit the team’s play dates and their location to the League by a January, 2022 date. This early date is because the League has to juggle all teams’ schedules and craft a League schedule that satisfies all.

Forget the possibility of a new arena in Tempe. The immediate and most critical question is where will the Coyotes play while waiting 3 to 5 years for a new arena? That is, IF Tempe accepts their RFP. The only word coming out of Tempe is that they are doing extensive due diligence.

I have found over the years that a deal is best crafted when both parties can trust each other. That may be the most seminal question that Tempe will have to decide. Can they trust the Coyotes to be good, reliable financial partners?

Let me make clear, the City of Glendale is done with the Coyotes. Their absolute refusal to negotiate a long-term, 20 year lease simply made the City’s decision clear. They will not be playing in Glendale for their 2022-23 season or in any future season. That door is closed.

While Glendale has no interest in where they play in the future, I think it’s fun to speculate and the rest of this blog is pure speculation. It is not based in fact or any insider knowledge.

The only viable location is the Arizona Veteran’s Memorial Coliseum. Keep in mind pursing this location as a temporary venue is dependent upon Tempe’s awarding the RFP to the Coyotes. Then it would make some sense to pursue a lease of the Coliseum. My guess it’s a 50/50 proposition as to whether Tempe accepts the Coyotes’ RFP. What if Tempe declines to award the Coyotes an RFP? For many that is an unthinkable outcome, but it is possible. If that were to happen, there would be no need of a temporary location and I would imagine a sale of the team would be imminent. This is the only play the Coyotes have. Forget all other locations. Each has a solid reason to be unworkable.

Here are the problems with the Coliseum. It’s now December, 2021. The work and the expense involved in renovating the building are extensive and even if work on the building started tomorrow, it is doubtful the building would be ready in a mere 10 months in time for the new season in October of 2022.

According to a recent Craig Morgan story of December 8, 2021, entitled Back to the future: Coliseum makes most sense as Coyotes’ interim arena solution, he, too, thinks the only temporary solution for the Coyotes is the Coliseum. Craig Morgan has always been very friendly and supportive of the Coyotes’ ownership over the years. One can speculate that he has sources within the organization and he is reflective of their thinking process.

The Coliseum has major structural problems. The building needs a need roof, new flooring and an additional ice plant for starters. Even with a new roof it can not accommodate a centrally hung scoreboard. There are no suites and maximum attendance would be in the 13,000 to 14,000 range. If the Coyotes do use the building they will continue to bleed financially.

I had heard that it would cost $40 to $50 million to get the building in shape for hockey but Morgan, in his article, cites a construction expert who said a more realistic number is in the $100 million range.

If Tempe awards the RFP to the Coyotes everything becomes a political calculation from that point forward. We can speculate that the Coyotes will go to Governor Doug Ducey and ask to rent the building (maybe for $1 a year?) and having a great deal of Chutzpah, demand that the state pay the cost of renovating the building for them…and, oh, by the way, you have 10 months to do so. Here’s where it really gets political. Ducey is a lame duck Governor, termed out. There are rumors that he intends to run for the U.S. Senate. He will have to make a political calculation as to how such action would play with his voter base. While he might win the support of 17,000 to 20,000 Coyotes fans there are far more voters that would not take kindly to any kind of financial give away to yet another sports franchise using taxpayer dollars. It could become the albatross that makes him unelectable.

The next few months will be very interesting as we watch this play out. My personal take is that the Coyotes will be sold. Alex Meruelo has become a liability to the NHL and especially to Gary Bettman.

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Nov 21

11

Glendale redistricting remains problematical

Posted by Joyce Clark on November 11, 2021
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City Council Actions • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Sahuaro District • Yucca district | Tagged With: City of Glendale, federal census of 2020, redistricting 2021 | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

After the Federal Census was performed in the Spring of 2020 a mandate to redraw political district lines applies. In Arizona that is for congressional districts, state legislative districts and local districts.

Glendale began this process this summer after the hiring of a consultant to assist with the technical aspects of the process. Glendale’s new map with council districts must be submitted to the state no later than December 15, 2021.

The city council has had a series of workshops on the issue and there has been a period of public comment. Below is the public comment that has been received to date and presented to city council at its most recent workshop on November 9, 2020.

Please note that one citizen comment was made requesting that the Copperwood community not be divided. This citizen request was accommodated by the consultant and the city council. Three citizens asked that the Independence Heights community remain within the Yucca district. Neither the consultant nor the city council accommodated these citizens’ request as can be seen by the preferred city council map, Draft A, presented by the consultants. See Map A here:

The traditional redistricting guidelines for consideration in drawing districts includes three items of particular importance. One is to preserve communities of interest another is to accommodate planned future growth and the third is to have a “nearly equal number of inhabitants” (Arizona Statute 9—473.B). Here are the guidelines, federal, state and traditional:

In my opinion, some of these guidelines have been not been satisfied. Lets take a look at future growth within the districts. Please refer to this map:

You will see numbers for each district. Upon receiving clarification from the consultant, these numbers refer to the number of residential units already approved or in the pipeline and anticipated to be approved. The nationally recognized multiplier of occupants per residential unit is 2.3.

Cholla 533 units X 2.3 increased population expected of 1,225.9
Sahuaro 944 units X 2.3 increased population expected of 2,171.2
Barrel 859 units X 2.3 increased population expected of 1,975.7
Cactus 342 units X 2.3 increased population expected of 786.6
Ocotillo 410 units X 2.3 increased population expected of 943
Yucca 7848 units X 2.3 increased population expected of 18,050.4

Also consider this:

Current population Map A Future planned population by district

Cholla 39,793 +1,225.9 40,018.9
Sahuaro 42,051 +2,171.2 44,222.2
Barrel 41,210 +1,975.7 43,185.7
Cactus 43,132 +786.6 43,918.6
Ocotillo 42,409 + 943 43,352.0
Yucca 39,820 +18.050.4 57,870.04

The startling fact that should be immediately apparent is that the Yucca district is expected to see an increase in population of nearly 20,000 new residents in the next few years. It will have a population of 13,000 more residents than Sahuaro district projected to have a population of 44,222.2.

Legal guidelines do permit accommodation for future growth. However, there is one caveat to that guideline. The Supreme Court has granted safe harbor for population plan deviations up to 10%. Map A offers a deviation of total population of 8.06%. However, that deviation is occurring in Sahuaro, Cactus and Ocotillo districts. I’m not convinced that adding another percentage point in total population deviation would make any substantial difference.

However, while accommodating the Copperwood community, Map A offers no accommodation for the Independence Heights neighborhood’s request to remain in the Yucca district. This is a distinct community of interest between Ocotillo Road and Maryland Avenue, 71^st Avenue to 75^th Avenue. I am convinced that the consultants could have accommodated their request with minimal disruption to other council district boundaries.

I found it astonishing that Councilmember Aldama, representing the Ocotillo district, into which Independence Heights would go, paraphrasing made the following comment, If I am losing the Sands neighborhood, it should be compensated for by including Independence Heights in the Ocotillo district. His comment virtually makes Independence Heights a pawn or consolation prize for losing the Sands neighborhood. I didn’t know that’s the way districts were to be drawn.

I am surprised that the only Councilmember that recognized the issues and supported keeping the Independence Heights neighborhood in the Yucca district was Councilmember Turner and for that, I thank him. To support their interests and their boundaries the rest of the council was willing to sacrifice the interests of the Yucca district.

Here’s two maps that I created. Obviously, they are not perfect. They were not vetted by the consultants and even though the population deviations are lower than the consultant’s Map A, they recognize that at some point council district boundaries are going to have to change dramatically to accommodate the growth occurring in the Yucca district. That is what occurs in my proposed draft maps. The Ocotillo boundary has to shift west at some point and that will create a domino effect in all of the other districts with their common boundaries moving further south. In fact, it should happen this time but it won’t.

A powerhouse in Glendale has not only been created but perpetuated for the next ten years until the 2030 census. The Yucca district is the largest geographically. The Yucca district will be the most populated of all 6 districts. The Yucca district is the epicenter of not only residential development but economic development as well.

If anything makes the case for the completion of Heroes Park, after 23 years of waiting for sports fields, a recreation and aquatics center, expansion of the smallest library in the city system and a dog park, this is it.

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

Sep 21

8

It’s time to redistrict Glendale

Posted by Joyce Clark on September 8, 2021
Posted in Barrell District • Cactus District • Cholla District • City issue and actions • City of Glendale • Glendale elected officials • Ocotillo District • Phoenix Metro issues • Sahuaro District • Yucca district | Tagged With: Barrel district, Cactus District, Census 2020, Cholla district, City of Glendale, Ocotillo District, redistricting, Sahuaro district, Yucca district | No Comments yet, please leave one

Disclaimer: The comments in this blog are my personal opinion and may or may not reflect an adopted position of the city of Glendale and its city council.

Every ten years, Glendale is required to redraw its City Council districts based on data from the U.S. Census. The process is called redistricting and the goal is to make sure each Council district has approximately equal population.

Let’s begin with the Census data for 2020 provided to the city. On July of 2019 the Census Bureau’s estimated population for Glendale was 252,387. It’s final, official count of Glendale is 248,325.

Everyone in the State believes the Bureau’s count is wrong and the population was undercounted. Experts said they expected to see even higher rates of growth. William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., who specializes in census data and urban populations, said he expected to see a higher growth rate in Arizona. Cities with council districts redraw those boundaries every 10 years after each U.S. census.

Four cities looking to redistrict by the next election in November include:

Mesa
Glendale
Peoria
Buckeye

Other Valley cities, such as Chandler, Scottsdale and Goodyear, don’t use a district system, instead electing council members on a citywide basis.

Look at this chart for Glendale.

City-data.com got its numbers from the Maricopa County estimates. I have no idea how the County arrived at these figures.

Please note, according to Census data, that every council district but the Yucca district added from 2,000+ in population to 6,000+ in population. Yet the Yucca district supposedly lost 315. Can anyone in their right mind believe this? The Yucca district has exploded over the last 10 years with new residential subdivisions (Copper Cove, Bethany Ranch and Positano to name just a few) as well as new apartment complexes. Yet, in the past ten years the Yucca district lost 315 people? Ridiculous. It’s nuts. The data makes no sense. The city should be requesting a recount of the Yucca district data. Someone, somewhere screwed up. If you put garbage in, garbage comes out. I suspect that the Yucca district, in fact, gained about 10,000 in population over the last decade.

Not only that, but the Census Bureau has also been late in releasing census block data (will do so this month, September) on population counts, the very data needed to redraw districts. As a result, Glendale has until December 15, 2021, about 3 months, to submit their new council districts to the State.

Here are the guidelines, city council adopted, that shall be used to redraw the districts:

Each district shall respect communities of interest as much as possible;
District borders shall follow visible natural and man-made geographical and topographical features as much as possible;
District borders shall be drawn to avoid locating more than one current Councilmember in any one district as much as possible;
Each new district shall preserve the corresponding existing district’s population and territory as much as possible;
Districts known to be areas of higher-than-average population growth in the two to five years following redistricting, based on development projects that have received final plat approval from the City, may be under populated within the population deviation amounts allowed by law;
To the extent possible, consistent with constitutional law and the requirements of federal and state statutes, each district shall contain a substantially equal number of electors.

The city has created a dedicated web site allowing all Glendale residents not only information about the redistricting process but on or about September 16^th the public can see the population data by census block and draw their own redistricting maps. Here is the link to the web site:

https://glendaleaz.com/your_government/connect/departments/city_clerk/redistricting/current_district_map

You can learn more and get involved by attending one of three public Glendale workshops. By the time of these city hosted workshops occur the appropriate data should be available on the city website to any citizen who wants it. Here are the workshop dates:

Monday, September 20	2:00 p.m.	Glendale City Council Chambers 5850 W. Glendale Avenue
Wednesday, September 22	10:00 a.m.	Glendale Main Library Auditorium 5959 W. Brown Street
Monday, September 27	6:30 p.m.	Foothills Recreation & Aquatics Center Coyote Room 5600 W. Union Hills Drive

Why should we focus on redistricting whether it be on a local, state or national level? We all vote for those representatives that most closely align with our values and goals. With redrawn districts you may find that now you are in a district that has a representative with whose values and goals with which you disagree. By involving yourselves in the redistricting process your input will contribute toward making sure that your representative actually represents you.

^{FAIR USE NOTICE}

« Previous Page — Next Page »

For "the rest of the story"

Categories

Archives

Recent comments from readers

Recent Posts

Archives

Spam Blocked

May 22

17

Share this:

Like this:

May 22

12

Share this:

Like this:

Apr 22

13

Share this:

Like this:

Mar 22

25

Share this:

Like this:

Mar 22

23

Share this:

Like this:

Feb 22

27

Share this:

Like this:

Dec 21

19

Share this:

Like this:

Dec 21

10

Share this:

Like this:

Nov 21

11

Share this:

Like this:

Sep 21

8

Share this:

Like this: